The rule of reason and the fundamentals against more presumption-based illegality legal standards: highlights on CADE’s decisions on digital economy issues
Dario da Silva Oliveira Neto, Otávio Augusto de Oliveira Cruz Filho, Alexandre Cordeiro Macedo
{"title":"The rule of reason and the fundamentals against more presumption-based illegality legal standards: highlights on CADE’s decisions on digital economy issues","authors":"Dario da Silva Oliveira Neto, Otávio Augusto de Oliveira Cruz Filho, Alexandre Cordeiro Macedo","doi":"10.1093/jaenfo/jnad042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article advocates against more presumption-based illegality legal standards. The focus is on the Rule of Reason analysis, which is in line with CADE’s case laws for analysing unilateral conducts, distinguishing between restraints with an anti-competitive effect (or resulting in conduct likely to cause such injury) that are harmful to the consumer, and restraints stimulating competition that are in the consumer’s best interest. In this sense, the article recalls some basic concepts, such as market power, dominant position, concentration indexes, and its interactions, since the recent discussions appear to have forgotten its basics. Moreover, a brief analysis of CADE’s procedures and the Brazilian Competition system, especially the analyses of unilateral conduct cases, is made in order to present a background for the readers. At the end, we report three digital antitrust cases judged by Cade to demonstrate the steps used by the authority in order to reach a decision on the case. In a nutshell, CADE has not shifted the analysis of unilateral conduct from the use of the rule of reason to a more presumption-based illegality approach.","PeriodicalId":42471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Antitrust Enforcement","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Antitrust Enforcement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnad042","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract This article advocates against more presumption-based illegality legal standards. The focus is on the Rule of Reason analysis, which is in line with CADE’s case laws for analysing unilateral conducts, distinguishing between restraints with an anti-competitive effect (or resulting in conduct likely to cause such injury) that are harmful to the consumer, and restraints stimulating competition that are in the consumer’s best interest. In this sense, the article recalls some basic concepts, such as market power, dominant position, concentration indexes, and its interactions, since the recent discussions appear to have forgotten its basics. Moreover, a brief analysis of CADE’s procedures and the Brazilian Competition system, especially the analyses of unilateral conduct cases, is made in order to present a background for the readers. At the end, we report three digital antitrust cases judged by Cade to demonstrate the steps used by the authority in order to reach a decision on the case. In a nutshell, CADE has not shifted the analysis of unilateral conduct from the use of the rule of reason to a more presumption-based illegality approach.
期刊介绍:
The journal covers a wide range of enforcement related topics, including: public and private competition law enforcement, cooperation between competition agencies, the promotion of worldwide competition law enforcement, optimal design of enforcement policies, performance measurement, empirical analysis of enforcement policies, combination of functions in the competition agency mandate, and competition agency governance. Other topics include the role of the judiciary in competition enforcement, leniency, cartel prosecution, effective merger enforcement, competition enforcement and human rights, and the regulation of sectors.